- This topic has 4 voices and 21 replies.
-
Posts
-
Economics plays into it, and I might even go so far as to say that the vast majority of wars in history were fought for economic reasons if you really analyze them. But the essential question remains; does superior technology always mean victory? I continue to maintain that human capital is more important in war than any technological edge.
history shows that a superior ship or line of ships almost always win.
No it doesn't. There are many examples of the British beating the superior and larger French ships.
What about naval technology? I think, except for a few exceptions, history shows that a superior ship or line of ships almost always win.
She was quoting you. So what do you really think? ???
Nice try, but no cigar. 😀 Superior seamanship I might even buy. If I remember Nelson beat the French transatlantic time by a few days through better seamanship. But then seamanship is not technology that reinforces my point about the human factor doesn't it?
It does, but they need the money to build those ships though and pay their navy.
That has to do with advanced technology leading to victory how?I am not talking about modern taxation but modern weaponry.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
